Bitcoin Forum

From http://www.cnbc.com/id/100774151:


To Peter:

Really fu**face? Who exactly have you been "crushing"?

How exactly are you "regulating" bitcoin when I can still buy and sell them without using any ID? When I can still buy and sell whatever I want with them over Silk Road?


To everyone else:

You have to ask, "What is CNBC and Peter trying to accomplish with this bit of propaganda?"

To someone who is low-tech and new to bitcoin, this would easily convince them that Peter is the head of bitcoin, and that he is making it a regulated currency.

Now you may realize that Peter is just a self appointed nitwit of a rather meaningless organization, but the average dumb american does not. The banks' strategy is to create a regulated sphere of bitcoin usage, and use their media to spin it like they are cracking down on everyone else. Sort of like shutting down Napster, and creating itunes. Thing is, that hasn't stopped anyone from downloading free music, and I doubt Peter and his band of assclowns will do any better with bitcoin - even with all the help in the world from the mainstream zionist media.


http://youtu.be/KbjQ1PeAbeg

I'm glad I never donated to Bitcoin Foundation.

What exactly are you trying to accomplish by pointing this out?

I gather that you don't like Vessenes, but beyond that: Point == Missed.

@corzine of the bitcoin world?

I wasn't making a point to you. This post is directed at Peter. I'd like him to explain who exactly he is "crushing".

wtf?

I guess this moron has never shopped at a grocery store, since they don't require ID. This guy is a frickin dipshit of epic proportions.

I propose someone start a new foundation for people who aren't fascist fu**wads.

crushing fiat transmitters that claim to be legit and trustworthy with our FIAT. then later found out they are not legit fiat transmitters.

its all about fiat..... meanwhile bitcoin remains unaffected.

if you think that bitcoin has been affected then you do not know bitcoin. please learn the non-exchange methods of obtaining bitcoin. the true, original way it was supposed to be dispursed.
hint peer-to-peer (localbitcoin / irc-otc) style

Ok, I'm just gonna expect that your a noob liberalist (no offense to other real liberalists)

WHY ARE YOU STILL LIVING IN THE US YOU PEACE OF SHIT!

If you do not agree with your governments laws you should just leave...

As for Peter Vessenes, if you actually followed the space, you know that he will put comments out there... Where a lot of people are.... Not sure how to interpret, and for some exactly the opposite of what they believe.

Fact is, that in order to go main-stream, you need main-stream media coverage, and you only get that if you are "Crushing Bad Actors" aka people who do not follow regulatory rules.

If you disagree with him and never supported the bitcoin foundation, though luck, its a free country and everybody can say what they want.

if you did support the bitcoin foundation and disagree with him, you should make sure someone else gets his spot at next elections. (highly recommended imo)



Spamming here on the forums will get you 0 response, and thus one of the above two options would be your best bet to change anything. (IMO, I know I wouldn't read a thread starting with "My Name: You're a fuckface" unless I was in a non-serious mood, and in for a great laugh. Then I would reply and just make fun of you (like I am now))

You donated didn't you  ;D.

In all seriousness any business worth anything in this community will have to comply with regulations at some point or another.

I do agree that Peters language is a bit unsettling in these interviews.

Good ol' American democracy in action and Freudian slip of the decade?

Naah, been thinking about it before all this crap started... but not sure anymore. (If I would've, the name Mylon would've been up there somewhere)

Yea totally agree on the fact that the language is unsettling... unfortunately its the language the main-stream media talks and understands... and in order to get on air with them, you need to talk the lingo.... :(

No issues here whatsoever complying with regulations (and imo I like the shout-out part that if you wanna do illegal shit in bitcoin, you're not welcome) the only thing that unsettles me is local tax here.... Having to give away 52% every year... I can gather so much bitcoin... constantly taking 52%.... at some point nothing will be left... if you know what I mean... So gotta figure out something for that, but thats long term issues, lets get bitcoin mainstream first.

Yea, the only sad part is that the last 30 years, in my opinion the US no longer has been a democracy, (1 person, 1 vote) not sure what to call it but nowadays its (1 dollar, 1 vote)

If you're ok with that and have a million or more, the US is the place for you, if you're unhappy with that, or don't have a million, best thing to do is leave asap.

Hey Mylon-the-moron,

Unless you're Peter, why don't you take his balls out of your mouth and stop swinging from them?

------For one, as a currency of limited quantity—about half of the 22 million bitcoins that can ultimately be "mined"

No one at CNBC knows what they are talking about or they deliberately acting like a dumb blond about all this..

There will never be more than 21million..... followed by infinite decimals places.

Sorry that is not how elections are won... Nice try. We would have mitt in office if this were the case.

Money is the only reason he even got close :P

But lets stay on topic...

This is a rather naive statement. Elections are just a show for the average dummie to think he makes a difference.

The elites decide who is going to be president - you and your meaningless "vote" have nothing to do with it.

https://i.imgur.com/mWNuLuC.png

Obama won and 'pocketed' $87m?


Also this.

Now, back on topic?  :D

I wonder if this is related:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=224057 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=224057)

It pangs of innocent-have-nothing-to-hide rhetoric.

I just want to make the point that Bitcoin is neither a business nor an institution, and is therefore outside the realm of regulation. It's more like a force of nature, and those trying to regulate it are (in my opinion) either seeking personal gain (whether political, financial, or both) or they're up to something else that can't be any good.

Although it is unnerving for me to hear Vessenes take credit like that, at the same time I wonder if this is just what bitcoin needs... A decoy.

Govs and their lapdog the mainstream media have absolutely no concept in their noggins about how bitcoin could evade their power. To them, every obstacle is a military problem; enough use of force and that'll fix it. They think they can use bombs and tanks on bitcoin if they need to one day, and that's why they don't panic now.

So it's good that we have a decoy out there, in their crosshairs, to let them feel they have someone they can pull a nondescript van full of spooks next to, and make dissapear, when the day comes that they want the pain to stop.

I say let him keep talking, and let the enemy keep thinking they can stop bitcoin by capturing Vessenes and the other foundation heads.

No vans full of spooks are coming after anyone involved in the Bitcoin Foundation. A centralized body like itself is exactly what governments will want/need in order to manipulate the network.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who sees the 'Bitcoin Foundation' for what it really is, another wannabe federal reserve.

+1

This Vesseness guy is... a "bad influence", to say the least.

I won't be surprised the day he proposes mandatory white-listing of addresses.
I hope Gavin knows that's the moment to jump off.

Yup.  And a centralized network is just what a centralized body like that needs.  They made a giant fuck-up by not waiting until the blocks were full and the limit was lifted (which couldn't happen to soon for our buddy ~justusranvier here.)  Unless it was baked into 0.8.2 somehow and nobody noticed.

You lost me with that one, hate-monger.

He's been sending really hurtful letters to Keanu Reeves

You guys can complain about it or support the Bitcoin Education Project. We are the only group right now that is growing into a force capable of building a Bitcoin foundation that represents the will of the community.

regarding liberty reserve...

compare this


to this:


now, think again about "foundation"

(taken from http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-05-30/liberty-reserve-and-why-some-money-launderers-are-more-equal-others)

No, as someone from Europe, I would love him not to listen to you but to stay and fight the laws (organised violence) of the state mafia, and fight against people like you, the happy slaves, who are accepting and supporting the organised violence. Everybody has the natural law to fight the state mafia at home first.

He's a fascist. Only he doesn't recognize it himself.

Zionism, christianism, islamism, communism, capitalism, nationalism - that's all fascism and idiotism, a labor slave ethos; the merger of corporate and state power.

You may not like peter, but it's perhaps more conducive to a conversation to be civil.

If by "we", he means The Bitcion Foundation, it would seem to be positioning itself as a kind of bitconi regulatory body in the United States.

The question remains as to who determines 'bad' and 'good' actors.  It seems that peter wants to do this, by introducing certifications (paid) etc.

This is a form of centralization that may not benefit bitcoin in the US, time will tell. 

A logical conclusion is that people like Satoshi would not be considered legit without paying the foundation, which seems to go against the grain of the original project concepts.

I have huge respect for Gavin, but it remains to be seen whether the foundation is going to be positive for bitcoin in the U.S.  That said, I do believe bitcoin is currently too U.S. centric, so it may end up being a plus ...

It's pretty obvious. Peter has been working with law enforcement to take down actors (competitors), including obviously, MtGox's subsidiary in the USA. Doing so means more business for 'legitimate' exchanges i.e. the ones he's connected to.

We will need to spread the power if we don't want it to collapse so agree that a counterparty is important

This topic is based on a typing error by CNBC.
If you watch the video and listen carefully, you can hear him say "... they've been following up on that guidance" - referring to FinCEN.

care to estimate the volume and liquidity in those channels? 

Possibly. Vessenes has the mindset of a narc.

Is it called a "plutocracy" ?

nice catch.

I listened to Peter in the video and it's definitely "they've" not "we've." Peter is just saying that FinCen has been going after those who are ignoring its interpretation of the law.

This BitcoinFoundation thing is just BS - I hope nobody is donating to them.

That said,  I still want the use of Bitcoin to go mainstream. The less regulation the better. Let technology figure out how to regulate the markets - not heavy handed, agenda driven Federal thugs that rule in favor of the banksters.

I think this is inevitable. Government isn't going to be able to keep up with technological innovation at this point. For every Fastcash4bitcoin or Dwolla acct they shutdown/seize, multiple replicas will spring up.

peter@coinlab.com

Would be nice to see the author of this thread apologize for slamming someone based on inaccurate research.

But somehow, I don't feel that some angry sounding bozo who bashes the "mainstream zionist media" is prone to make an apology.

These types of xenophobia and anger management issues probably belong on some extreme right wing hate site, not on a thread about a serious technological advance, attacking a serious person who has probably done way more than the thread's author to advance the adoption of bitcoin. Love or hate Peter Vessenes, I definitely think he's more capable and representative of bitcoin's potential than the author of this thread.

Peter Vessenes appears to be the Limited Partner behind Bitcoinica.

Tihan has worked hard to keep the identity of the LP secret (There is a shell company in Barbados called the Wendon group) most likely to avoid any liability leaving Bitcoinica customers who had funds there royally screwed. One year later not a single customer has seen their coins returned. And we are talking many tens of thousands of BTC and USD here.

I will avoid anything that has his name attached to it like the plague. And yes, that includes the Bitcoin Foundation.

Reference: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=196150

Good catch.

Well, well now, so the Mayor of Bitcoinland is a master thief. Sounds about right. Carry on. All is normal. Nothing to see here.

Wow, can't say I'm surprised though. What a world class asshole. Where can I find this guy? I'd like to have a "talk" with him.

He was the guy building coin mixing services, now he wants regulations... LOL, I guess.

Some people need to read between the lines.

Peter absolutely should be saying things like he's saying. Think about it long and hard and you'll figure it out. Don't be so dense.

If the public perception of bitcoin is that it's a bunch of rogues, it'll come under attack sooner than otherwise. If the public perception is that there are some rogues, but in general it's full of compliance-seekers, especially in the all-important Bitcoin Foundation, then the attack will be delayed or prevented.

The phrase walk softly and carry a big stick is important to keep in mind. The public face of Bitcoin should be gentle, accomodating, and non-extreme. It should be business-focused, and not political. The effect of Bitcoin, however, should be known by Bitcoiners anyway and doesn't need to be discussed in polite company ;)

hypocrite much?

Nice taqiyya. Are you shi'a?

I didn't know evoorhees was Muslem. He looks like Wonder Bread to me.

I have no idea. I just like shitting on voorhees.

Wrong, and I've heard this before. And it was wrong then just as it is now. "it'll come under attack sooner than otherwise" - Erik - it already IS under attack. Don't be so dense.

I have a better option for Peter - don't create his own little organization and claim to be the ruler, and then he doesn't have to say anything.

Most of what you say makes you sound like one of the good guys, Erik, but the company you keep has always indicated otherwise. Statements like this only confirm my suspicions.

How about we cut out the govt/banks from bitcoin ourself. We do not need to 'work with anyone.' Fuck them, this is bitcoin. Its value is derived entirely free of money.

Peter Vessenes should resign.  One month ago when Coinlab sued Mtgox, there was an uproar on Reddit with these two posts rising to the top:

Open Letter to the Bitcoin Foundation: In Light Of Recent Events, Peter Vessenes' Position As Executive Director Is Surely Now Untenable
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1dlsnl/open_letter_to_the_bitcoin_foundation_in_light_of/

Peter Vessenes just destroyed the credibility of the Bitcoin Foundation.
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1dljfu/

It is outrageous to have him as the executive director:

1) He sued Mtgox, one of the other four board members, for 75m
2) He kicked Mtgox off of the bitcoin conference schedule after suing them
3) He set the admission cost of the bitcoin conference to be lower if paid with a credit card
4) He cofounded Coinlab with Tihan Seale.  They are scum.
5) Coinlab has not built anything and doesn't do anything for the bitcoin community.


We need an action plan to rid our community of scum, although I agree with Voorhees that this particular comment is fine.  If anyone who posted on the first page wants to edit in this post, the would be good.

OMG, someone who can say something which isn't loaded with hypocrisy and actually makes sense.
Welcome!

Exactly. I've heard this bullshit rhetoric of "let's work with them" before bitcoin was even around. It was spewing from Wayne Allen Root when he was compromising the libertarian party for a "seat at the table".

It was bullshit then, and its bullshit now. By trying to work with them, you lose, and apparently that seems to be what Voorhees is pushing for despite all the anarcho-capitalist talk he does. Reminds me of people back in 2008 in my Ron Paul MeetUp that were trying to steer the group towards "working with" the republican party leadership. I didn't buy it and ended up discovering that the people trying to push the group in that direction were indeed moles who were trying to derail us - even though they talked the talk - lying about their beliefs is what a good mole does well.

But Erik, you already know all this. What's your claim to fame here? A gambling site? Bitinstant? If you really cared about bitcoin succeeding, you would have thought of other sites to come up with than something as self serving as an online craps game. And I think most level-headed people know that bitinstant is just an attempt at controlling BTC<->USD exchange.

> I've heard this bullshit rhetoric of "let's work with them" before bitcoin was even around.

Right.  Long before. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeasement


Here is an effective strategy:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tit_for_tat


I don't follow "leaders", especially self-appointed ones, and I don't support the Bitcoin Foundation.

So everything is a conspiracy?  There is no such thing as perfect election but we DO have to have it.

Conspiracy:

Noun
1. A secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful.
2. The action of plotting or conspiring.

To answer your question, yes, just about everything is in some way a conspiracy. Hundreds of people are convicted of it by the government EVERY DAY. People plot and conspire all the time. The question is does their plotting help you? or them?

I conspire against the USA and the douches that run it every day.

I think you overestimate the government. I break their rules all the time - pretty much every day.

Oh so you mean all the conspiracy's that have become true? I don't get people who believe in conspiracy's  you realize it takes ALOT of people to do it and keep it a secret?  That means not one rat or mole can say on thing of "action of plotting or conspiring".  In other words, there is NO CONSPIRACY with our elections.  Evil plotting sure but conspiracy I think not.

You underestimate Bitcoin's censorship-resistant abilities.

Erik, it's not just words (although words often do tell a lot... I don't view you, for instance, begging for more regulation... something tells me it would make you sick with yourself, which is a good indicator on your character)

But in Vesseness case, there's more to it. This lawsuit against MtGox... wtf? Plus this suspicious involvement with Bitcoinica, which is still owing thousands of bitcoins to many.

I'm sorry, but I still believe this Peter Vesseness is the type of guy that won't hesitate to use the state and its regulation to rule out competitors. He looks too suspicious to me. I don't trust him. I'd love to be proved wrong, but for now, that's how I see it.

Yes he's just in it for himself

He's looking for high positions in government. Possibly some well connected regulation office as a director/advisor aimed towards treasury law enforcement.

Erik.  As Pope to an army of tards and thus the commander of crack legions of SPV clients, you are a king-maker in Bitcoin-land.  I council you to distance yourself from ~vess.  I mean just publicly or course...to preserve your power for when it really counts.

That is my view also. It appears that Coinlab wants to own the US Bitcoin Space.

They way they are doing it by capturing the media channels through the Bitcoin Foundation. Capturing the development team also through the Foundation. And clearing the playing field of competitors by digging up dirt and setting the regulators on their scent (speculation)

Just look at the Gox/Dwolla shutdown, the Liberty Reserve shutdown, the OKPay issues, the Tangible Cryptography shutdown, etc.

And then look at his statements:


Coinlab has not produced any valuable service to the bitcoin community that I am aware of. It is easy for them to play 'safe'. In this light I also understand the action of Satoshi Dice not to serve US customers for the time being and Peter selling http://app.bitlaundry.com/ while this crackdown is going on.

I could be wrong, I could be paranoid. But this entire things smells fishy to me and Peter is smack in the middle of it.

Sure, good points. Let me clarify my position.

I was commenting purely on the statements Peter recently made, and his common "pro regulation" stance. I think someone in a position such as he has is perfectly justified in making those statements. BUT - that justification ends where action begins. To the extent he actually assists, fosters, and furthers state actors against Bitcoin or Bitcoin businesses, then I am very much opposed.

His lawsuit with Gox is certainly awkward and I don't know who's in the right or wrong so I'll just stay out of it. If I ever knew that he used his position at the Foundation to harm someone or some company that hadn't caused harm to someone else, then he would have no support or defense from me whatsoever.

I do not have enough inside information to know what position to take on Peter, at this point, so I remain neutral. But, narrowly speaking, on the topic of "what someone like that should be saying when the authorities come knocking," I think a policy of "keep my friends close and my enemies closer" is a wise policy, and the public "official" representatives (and we know there aren't any but the press doesn't, and that's fine) should not be taking overtly anarchistic positions - not because that position is incorrect morally, but because it is less likely to foster the environment in which Bitcoin has the best chance of thriving.

tl;dr - If his talk is statist, that's fine and maybe even productive. If his actions are statist, then he must absolutely go away and wouldn't be worthy of anyone's support whatsoever.

The two are the same. That was the point of giving you the definition. duh

Mtgox is the biggest ally in any attempt to subvert the Bitcoin Foundation.  Both Bitinstant and Coinsetter are based in New York, so maybe they would get on board too since they aren't so close to Vessenes.  
Gavin is a big proponent of the Foundation, but maybe he would distance himself if a different foundation offered to pay his salary.

Obviously it would be better if Peter would just resign.  Does anyone know what the rules are for ousting him?  Perhaps we can pressure other board members to take action.

I believe there is going to be an election very soon, and that Peter will be stepping down.

This is excellent news.  Any further info about the date would be appreciated so that we know when we can resume donating to the Bitcoin Foundation.

How about you, Eric?  Will you be dissociating yourself now that you've fled to Costa Rica, or is it just your corporation that moved there?  I hear it worked out really well for that Liberty Reserve guy (http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-05-29/business/39596554_1_crime-hub-costa-rica-crooks).

How does one run for said election?

Oh, yes, please get the self-important douchebag up on that there post, that'll help.















My comedy mining operation. It'll help my comedy mining operation.

I love you too Greyhawk

No trolling please. It is against the forum rules. http://www.musiker-board.de/attachments/f3-musik-instrumente-know-how//f75-e-gitarren-forum//f39-modifikation-technik-gitarrenbau-e-git//188660d1312529323-refinish-gibson-les-paul-standard-faded-professor.gif

Yep. This thread is founded on a false premise. OP should edit his post to reflect that.

Vessenes should:
1: Contact Matt Twomey at CNBC.
2: Point out the mistranscription.
3: Demand to have it corrected.

Lest he wants this error re-reported and echo-chambered far and wide.

---

During his opening speech at Bitcoin 2013,
Vessenes stated that he is stepping down.

I believe his words were "will be replaced, fairly soon", or something to that effect.

The video is on youtube. Someone may want to find the exact quote.

Wow what a waste of a human life

It really makes no difference. None whatsoever. He shares the sentiment, so whether he said "we've" or "they're" makes no difference at all.

damn, just wasted 10mins of my life reading this shit. . .get a life man.

PS: if your gonna be hatin on someone at last have a valid point to hate 1 for.

+10,000

+20,000

Please explain how.

Peter HAS made several remarks regarding indicating how pro-regulation he is, and the statement in question is in support of government interference as well, otherwise he wouldn't have used a verb like "crushing".

Here's a pool to start  :D

Here's the full quote:



Peter doesn't understand free markets. He takes the standard fascist approach that the consumer needs people like him to protect them from scammers, rather than caveat emptor. Generally, these types of power hungry fuckholes are the same people that did the scamming in the first place (Bitcoinica?) as an excuse to come in later and say "I can help protect you from this."

It's the same tactic the mafia uses.

Can someone please tell that Peter dude that I don't want, wish or need his protection?...
Maybe I would enjoy if he sucked my dick, but that's about it and only after taking his teeth off with a couple punches.

i will agree with this. this is the better way to show he is a failcat.

Land of the free, home of the brave, huh?  I broke stupid laws constantly when I lived there, and never ended up in a cage, but finally the masses of dumbed-down, cowardly slaves were too much to stand, so I left.  My ISP has no record of my identity.